Re: Brinks v Jim Rojas New Motion

[Nomen Nescio <nobody@xxxxxxxxx>]

You just don't seem to get it, Jim.  Every word you write here will be
quoted back to the judge in an attempt to make you look bad.  The more crap
you sling at Brink's, the worse it will make you look.  If you're going to
piss people off, at least wait until after a judgment is entered against
you.

You're playing a game of poker, only you think you're playing blackjack.
The judge doesn't care what you write here, except insofar as it makes you
look like a bad person.  She doesn't read this newsgroup.  She only reads
what people put in the motions they send her.  You're not sending her any,
so she's only reading Brink's side of the story.  That's your fault, not
Sableman's.  It's not his job to present a fair and balanced view of
things.  It's his job to represent Brink's.

You're in the fix you're in because you didn't answer the lawsuit when you
were supposed to.  The judge has given you an opportunity to make one last
legal challenge before you get hammered, and you are apparently wasting it.

In short, Brink's is following the rules of the litigation game, and you
are not.  All the bitching and moaning here and on your website won't
change the outcome.  You have about one week left to file a good legal
argument with the court on why a Texas court doesn't have the authority to
enter a judgment against you.  Don't blow the opportunity.  See if you can
hire a lawyer for the limited purpose of preparing this motion; he doesn't
have to represent you for the entire case.  The money you spend on lawyers
now is money Brink's can't take away from you later.

For the benefit of the Brink's lawyers who are reading this:  there are
multiple Nomen Nescios posting messages here.  This one, I assure you, is
not Jim Rojas posting under an alias, and your assertions that Jim is
posting under aliases are not only without foundation, they border on the
ridiculous.

Let's see you quote that to the judge.